Batter Interference

[VaCoach]

Simple question, runner on first who attempts to steal second, batter is called for interfering with catchers throw to second. Question: Umpire called the baserunner out, and let the batter continue his at bat. Is this correct, or is the batter out and the runner must go back to first base? I don't understand why the runner would be out when he did nothing wrong. Thanks for your help on this matter.

[bluezebra]

Originally Posted by VaCoach

Simple question, runner on first who attempts to steal second, batter is called for interfering with catchers throw to second. Question: Umpire called the baserunner out, and let the batter continue his at bat. Is this correct, or is the batter out and the runner must go back to first base? I don't understand why the runner would be out when he did nothing wrong. Thanks for your help on this matter.

That PU didn't understand, either. The rule, that is. Batter's out for interference, runner(s) return.

OBR: 6.06 A batter is out for illegal action when-

(c) He interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter's box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher's play at home base.

EXCEPTION: Batter is not out if any runner attempting to advance is put out, or if runner trying to score is called out for batter's interference. If the batter interferes with the catcher, the plate umpire shall call "interference." The batter is out and the ball dead. No player may advance on such interference (offensive interference) and all runners must return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference.

Bob

[radwaste50]

Originally Posted by VaCoach

Simple question, runner on first who attempts to steal second, batter is called for interfering with catchers throw to second. Question: Umpire called the baserunner out, and let the batter continue his at bat. Is this correct, or is the batter out and the runner must go back to first base? I don't understand why the runner would be out when he did nothing wrong. Thanks for your help on this matter.

Unless the catchers throw still retired the runner in spite of the interference this was ruled incorrectly

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by VaCoach

Simple question, runner on first who attempts to steal second, batter is called for interfering with catchers throw to second. Question: Umpire called the base runner out, and let the batter continue his at bat. Is this correct, or is the batter out and the runner must go back to first base? I don't understand why the runner would be out when he did nothing wrong. Thanks for your help on this matter.

If the base ump called the runner trying to steal second base out, the interference is ignored and the batter will continue his time at bat. Is this what possibly happened?

[justanotherblue]

If it was the third strike, then you have two outs. One for the strikeout, then the runner is out for the interference of the catchers throw.

[David B]

Originally Posted by VaCoach

Simple question, runner on first who attempts to steal second, batter is called for interfering with catchers throw to second. Question: Umpire called the baserunner out, and let the batter continue his at bat. Is this correct, or is the batter out and the runner must go back to first base? I don't understand why the runner would be out when he did nothing wrong. Thanks for your help on this matter.

You are correct as others have said, the BR is out. For some reason, maybe because it doesn't happen a lot, many umpires confuse this rule and call the runners out.

I always try to remember, we want to penalize the offense as much as we can on this play, so we get BR out and the runner returning, unless there are other situations which were described such as strike three or the runner being retired.

But we learn from our mistakes. Many years ago in a big game I was the young umpire and let the veteran talk me out of the correct ruling on this type of play.

After checking the books later, I have never missed this call again.

Thanks
David

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by David B

I always try to remember, we want to penalize the offense as much as we can on this play, so we get BR out and the runner returning, unless there are other situations which were described such as strike three or the runner being retired.

Not a good thing to remember, because it's wrong. It penalizes the offense more to remove runners from base, but that's the wrong penalty here.

Better thing to try to remember is the actual penalty.

[David B]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Not a good thing to remember, because it's wrong. It penalizes the offense more to remove runners from base, but that's the wrong penalty here.

Better thing to try to remember is the actual penalty.

Sure its best to remember the penalty, but the penalty is very complex and very hard to remember.

I always like to use guidelines to remember the rules and I teach that to young umpires. If you just call the runner out that is one penalty. Call the BR out and returning the runner is two penalties thus you have a bigger penalty.

Sometimes its a good thing for the defense to allow the runner to stay on base especially when the BR is a good hitter who is usually the ones who are going to try and "get away" with interference at the plate.

That's easier to me to recall in the spur of the moment as opposed to "with less than two out the batter is out, and runners return, and with two out the BR is out, unless the runner advancing is at third etc.,"

Thanks
David

[charliej47]

Look at the second half or the penalty. If the runner is stealing home and there are less then two outs, you call the runner out, otherwise call the batter out and send back the runner back.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by David B

Sometimes its a good thing for the defense to allow the runner to stay on base especially when the BR is a good hitter who is usually the ones who are going to try and "get away" with interference at the plate.

That's easier to me to recall in the spur of the moment as opposed to "with less than two out the batter is out, and runners return, and with two out the BR is out, unless the runner advancing is at third etc.,"

Thanks
David

How this is easier than 'batter's out, runners return' is beyond me. Reads like you are introducing some sort of game strategy into your penalty deliberations.

[jdmara]

I know everyone just has their own way of remember this rule but I always remember the batter is out unless there is less than two outs and the runner is advancing from third, then the runner is out. All other times the batter is out and the runners return to their place at the time of the pitch.

-Josh

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by LMan

How this is easier than 'batter's out, runners return' is beyond me. Reads like you are introducing some sort of game strategy into your penalty deliberations.

Exactly. The rules are not easy, but they're easier than the contorted and usually erroneous versions that people learn instead.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Exactly. The rules are not easy, but they're easier than the contorted and usually erroneous versions that people learn instead.

Well said! All the crap people have believed for years (IE, hand = bat) is what confuses people.

-Josh

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Exactly. The rules are not easy, but they're easier than the contorted and usually erroneous versions that people learn instead.

Oh I don't know. The phrases "1 from the rubber, 2 from the field" and "The pitcher deceived the runner" and "He gets the base he was going to plus one more" always work just fine. What coach can argue a catchy phrase like one of those?

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Oh I don't know. The phrases "1 from the rubber, 2 from the field" and "The pitcher deceived the runner" and "He gets the base he was going to plus one more" always work just fine. What coach can argue a catchy phrase like one of those?

You left out -- "tie goes to the runner", and "the ground can't cause a fumble", on a dropped catch attempt........................


Tim.